Nov 8, 2007 2:44pm
Re: studio better than live?
wow. I didnt think the Box would go that far
(thats what she said)
I have to admit Ive going through quite a few Boxes
today (you can take that however you want) and I have to
grasp ARBs edit of "Dont confuse the auds reaction to the
I think that might have been what I was doing.
From (sorry no hyper-link) 12-11-72 to some mid-80s
to even 1-25-93, there isnt one that measures up to the studio.(Box)
Which brings us to the other points being made.
Skuzzle--several valid points
And(of course) WillTell hits the nail of the head:
"Almost everyone off Working and AB" and "vocal albums"
These albums are untoucable in comparision to a live version of a song off of them, really if you think about it
Which brings me to another point. It got me thinking of
SUGMAG. There is a song that went from being a fun, yet
fairly delicate tune to a rock and roll monster on stage.
It had to become different on stage. Does that make it "better or worse" becomes an unanswerable quetion.
I think any one of the songs off Working and AB had to make that transition too. But paradoxally, Im sure there are
hundreds of better versions(or chosen favs) of SUGMAG,
So I apprecitate all the takes on this, and I think I
finally got my head right.
Leave it to lobster for another mind-fuck thread
I'll keep diggin deeper to lobtsers original quest of the
Built to Last and give that Hampton 89 a spin (AGAIN!)